|
| |
PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
For copies
of the previous minutes please contact Sally Johnson at
Phone: 203-854-7810 x 6778 or Email sjohnson@norwalkct.org
CITY OF NORWALK
PLANNING COMMITTEE
SEPTEMBER 7, 2006
ATTENDANCE: Matthew Miklave, Chair; Carvin Hilliard; William Krummel;
Rev. Bolden (7:40 p.m.); Nicholas Kydes (7:40 p.m.);
Douglas Hempstead 7:50 p.m.)
STAFF: Jack Burritt, Assistant Executive Director; Munro Johnson,
Susan Switzer, Senior Project Managers for Development
GUESTS: Kevin Poruban, Common Council
CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Miklave opened the meeting at 7:38 p.m. and noted that there was not a quorum present. He added that there were no action items on the agenda.
Rev. Bolden and Mr. Kydes arrived at 7:40 p.m.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Mr. Tony Doumlele commented on the hotel study and said that two weeks ago a select service hotel in Stamford was put on the market because it was a non-strategic asset that produced negative operating income for two years. Mr. Doumlele submitted an article from The Stamford Advocate dated August 11, 2006. Mr. Doumlele said that the findings from the Holiday Inn Select should hold some weight.
Mr. Doumlele also spoke about his concern for the retail sales leakage. He said that two years ago the Redevelopment Agency brought in Bonds & Co. who made a presentation. He said that they said that private developers use those numbers but municipalities should not use them.
Retail sales leakage implies that they are bad, but fixable. Retail sales leakage is a matter of choice and geography. Mr. Doumlele distributed and highlighted the details of the RKG study. He told the Committee if they believed the RKG study, then that confirms what Mr. Seligson says.
Mr. Hempstead arrived at 7:50 p.m. There was a quorum present.
Mr. Kim Morquay, Spinnaker said that there is a lack of available land and a tremendous demand for retail services in the area.
There were no further comments and the public participation portion of the meeting was closed.
Mr. Miklave suggested moving the approval of the minutes to the end of the agenda. The Committee members agreed.
BUSINESS
A. REED PUTNAM URBAN RENEWAL PLAN (Discussion Only)
1. Presentation and Discussion of Staff Recommendations – Redevelopment Parcels 1, 2 & 4
Mr. Burritt explained that each member received in their packets copies of the staff memo outlining their recommendations for Parcels 1, 2 & 4. The recommendations are being presented in an effort to foster a dialogue with all of the parties who are part of this process.
Mr. Burritt gave a power point presentation of the Staff’s Recommendations for Parcels 1, 2 & 4.
Mr. Miklave said that the 2003 study indicated that a hotel was not feasible, but they are now seeing that a hotel is feasible and appropriate for the site. He asked what was different now.
Mr. Burritt explained that the study in 2003 was for a full service hotel. He pointed out that they never asked for an analysis of the select service hotel on Parcel 3. While there was demand, the demand did not translate into room rates high enough to justify a full service hotel
A select service hotel was not investigated for parcel 3 because the consultants said that 3 -500, 000 sq. ft. would not warrant a full service hotel.
Rev. Bolden asked what would be wrong with having a full service hotel in South Norwalk. Mr. Burritt said that there was nothing wrong with having one in Norwalk, if the economics could support a full service hotel. He said that a lot of people want to see a full service hotel on the site, but it is difficult to make the dollars and cents work for a full service hotel. Rev. Bolden said that she believed that a full service hotel could work on the site.
Mr. Kydes said that they need to be flexible to meet the needs of a changing economy. He was on the Planning Commission, under Mr. Thomas’ Chairmanship where there was a lot of debate about the hotel issue. Overall the plan is well balanced as presented.
Mr. Krummel asked about the percentage of affordable housing in the plan. He suggested increasing the amount of affordable housing to 20% for this project based on the original plan.
Mr. Krummel said that he was receptive to mixed use, but does not want to repeat history. He asked what was defective in the former market study calling for 1 mill sq. ft. of officespace. Mr. Burritt said that there was nothing defective about it. It was done by a reputable firm in 1998, but markets change. The original 1983 plan had mixed uses on a portion of the site.
Mr. Krummel asked if it was feasible to phase in the entire development project so that they do not clear out a neighborhood. He said that he is offering that suggestion as a possible solution to some of the concern he is hearing about the Wall Street and West Avenue development projects.
Mr. Krummel said that he and some other Council members heard the distress from some of the residents because of the flooding that occurred on their properties over the weekend as a result of the heavy rains. He said that he is concerned that the City will not be able to meet the needs of the residents because of a lack of resources.
Mr. Krummel said that he is concerned that because of the new development, City services may be taken away from the population in the City. He asked if there is funding that should be put into the DPW budget.
Mr. Hempstead said that the plan presented looks better than the plan that was presented a few months ago. He asked for an up to date executive summary of the market studys, including the former Perkin Elmer site.
Mr. Hempstead said that he was concerned about the loss of office space and suggested that if the hotel is not built, that that site revert to office space. Mr. Burritt agreed and said that was their recommendation.
Mr. Hempstead asked about the height of the buildings. Mr. Burritt said that the buildings will comply with Zoning regulations pertaining to height.
Mr. Hempstead said that he would appreciate it if the developer could come up with a catering facility that could accommodate proms or other large gatherings.
Mr. Kydes said that the demand for office and retail space is going to vary. He said that he does not agree with the statement that the City purchased properties 20 years ago and raised those properties. He said that the land was purchased over time and raised over time. Mr. Kydes said that if they procrastinate, the demands are going to be different and the developers may no longer want to improve the area.
Mr. Miklave said that if things change over time, who can say that in 2 – 3 years they will see a demand for office space so strong as to defy their predictions. He said that this is a show piece area. Jobs for the 21st century are knowledge based jobs and they create opportunities. He said that they need to think about that impact. Mr. Miklave commended the staff for considering a variety of issues. He urged everyone to discuss the impact of job creation over the long term.
Mr. Poruban said that people are moving away from home offices to the office in the home. He asked Mr. Burritt if he could find non-industrial information on telecommuting and tax revenues. Mr. Poruban asked Mr. Burritt for tax information for condominiums with office space.
Rev. Bolden asked Mr. Burritt what year the City began to seize Putnam Avenue. Mr. Burritt said that they entered into an agreement on May 7, 2001. The developer began negotiating with the property owners from the fall of 2001 to 2003. During that time only three gas station properties were aquired through eminent domain.
Mr. Burritt said that the French Company became involved in November 1985 and purchased the F. G. DeWaters Hardware site. In 1988-1989 it became clear that the people living in the area were living in hazardous properties. At that time French was told that if they had to acquire properties they had to pay the state relocation fees to the residents.
Mr. Burritt said that the French Company paid the property owners 20% above the market value for their properties. Rev. Bolden asked Mr. Burritt why the City dislocated people from their homes and businesses, but did not develop those sites. Mr. Burritt told Rev. Bolden that he heard what she was saying.
Mr. Krummel said that the comments about multiple uses are excellent. When he was in Chile a few years ago, he was very impressed by a mixed office/hotel use.
Mr. Burritt said that Mr. Morquay is very active in those kinds of uses through ULI and said that those mixed use ideas will be explored.
Rev. Bolden told Mr. Morquay that parcel 3 is stunning.
Mr. Miklave asked to table the rest of the agenda to the next meeting.
** REV. BOLDEN MOVED TO TABLE THE REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS TO THE NEXT MEETING
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
July 6, 2006 – Regular Meeting
July 20, 2006 – Regular Meeting
B. WEST AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN (Discussion Only)
1. Identification and Discussion of Issues Pending Preceding Plan Implementation
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT
** MR. KYDES MOVED TO ADJOURN
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Rosemarie Lombardi
Telesco Secretarial Services
 |
 |